WizardMarks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Following the Jesuit tradition, I ask, how could Johnson be two places at once?
WM: Actually, it's the state that denies Johnson's a
lobbyist. He is not registered with the state as a
lobbyist.
David Piehl asks: Would he be required to register in Minnesota if the lobbying is in Washington? (honest question)
Everyone's allowed to quit one job and take another. It appears to me that's what the guy did.
WM: The district is one and one third block long.Wizard wrote: According to the architects at a PAC meeting last week, the architects met with Piehl within the last month to show him the drawings for the corner of 31st. St. and Second Av. and see whether he approved of them.
David Piehl writes:
Actually, the meeting was Wednesday, April 2, and it
was for all residents of the historic district,
specifically the 2nd Avenue residents.
It is part ofWM: The satisfactory stamp is put on by the state's historic preservation office, right?
the federally mandated process regarding impact on
federally designated historic structures. The
results: while the architects finally managed to get
the median right, after 8 months of the residents
describing it to them - the general consensus is
non-approval of the proximity of the freeway. Tom
Johnson had promised to work on that issue, and may
yet produce some results but the work to date is not
satisfactory.
WM: Interesting to note that you deny you're the leader of the laundromat on this one David. A vocal minority is a vocal minority, even if it includes every person in the Healy Historic District. I don't know who made that remark, but the numbers agree with it.We are currently gathering information and contemplating options. A block meeting will be scheduled to determine our action plan. Whatever idiot claimed at the PAC that Healy Historic District residents are ok with the plan other than "a vocal minority" flat out lied. That is not the consensus of the residents, and was another misrepresentation to the PAC. We do feel that progress has been made, whether it is sufficient hasn't been answered since the meeting was just a few days ago.
Wizard wrote:WM: Yes, I was in attendance. From what the man said, he quoted no federal law. He said, "Nothing's set in stone, everything's on the table." The appointed body, blue ribboned three ways from the middle, open to every suggestion anyone cared to make for 3 and 1/2 years, spent four years, at the behest of nine neighborhoods to use the Lake St. at the Crossroads document as a blueprint for reviving Lake St. That document had been accepted by the neighborhoods.
On Tuesday of last week, Ken Avidor presented himself
to the March 03 PAC meeting as representing STRIDE
with a list of suggestions, saying "nothing was set in
stone, everything is on the table." (Referring to the Phase I plan. The effrontery shown by coming into
a county appointed/neighborhood recommended body to
assert that the work they had spent 4 years completing
was "on the table" to be picked apart and redone
(presumably by STRIDE members) was spectacular.
David Piehl writes: I wasn't in attendance (were you?), but I believe Ken quoted the federal laws that give him the right to make that statement. I know the private-public partnerships may object, but it is federal law.
Can we infer, then, that the Historic Healy District and STRIDE's aim is to tie up this project in federal court for X number of years? What would that do for the economic health of South Mpls. and it's residents? What positive gain will the body politic get from such a scenario?
Wizard wrote:WM: The minutes tell the tale. Look it up. As a PAC the job of all the people there was to discuss, then accept or reject ideas. Apparently, Lilligren was not able to persuade his fellows at the PAC to his way of thinking and so aquiesced. The minutes do not show many minority votes from Lilligren.
Lilligren sat on the PAC for four years and voted with
the group on virtually everything but the final outcome.
David Piehl writes: If you had been there, you would know that Lilligren often dissented, and was sometimes the lone dissenter. I've learned alot from him about avoiding "groupthink".
WM: There it is, the conspiracy theory. The goal of the PAC was to obtain access to the freeway for the people who live, work, and generally hang out in South Minneapolis. If you sat on that PAC without agreeing to the goal, then you sat there falsely.Wizard wrote: Piehl was plugged in to the process and walked away.
David Piehl writes: Wrong again. I resigned from the CNIA board because of the liability it entailed, and the CNIA seat I occupied was passed to another board member. I didn't mind leaving the PAC, as by that time I realized I was being used by MNDoT & Smith Parker to legitimize a predetermined outcome. (rubberstamp) We've had this discussion more than once. I remain involved in the process.
MNDOT was there to throw its weight around, as always. I think the Strib, at least, did a good job on cataloging that arrogance.
If the plan, as envisioned by the PAC goes through, then MNDOT will have been held in check for ten or maybe more years. That will allow us time to get all the pieces in place and to organize against their next move. O'Keefe is still at MNDOT, and he has not proven himself an honest broker in this process.
WM: I, too, resigned from the CNIA board around the same time, but it did not keep me from sitting on a PAC committee, had I chosen to do so. Nor did it keep me from being informed about the PAC's work.
STRIDE and Healy Block, et.al., have organized from the position that to stay and keep the pressure on MNDOT was to be a dupe.
I don't feel that MNDOT could dupe Craig Anderson, Chair of the PAC, nor Mrytle Vikla, Marie Hauser, nor Dave Jensen, Scott Persons, et.al. They all have pretty good radar. They were very effective in confining MNDOT to the current trench. They were very effective in keeping the loss of city housing, within two miles of a major federal traffic artery, down to 18 units of housing. They did as good a job as possible in getting Aaron Issacson (MCTO) to cough up something less than monstrous--not at all easy. They got Sabathani to be considered in the equation, instead of left to clean up behind them and take the fallout. They got the 35th/36th street exits removed--at your suggestion. They got the new ramps at 38th St., where they were supposed to be originally--at your suggestion. They made compromises, the held steady on mitigation. They rejected the ugly. They incorporated a suggestion from Dave Jensen (Central Neighborhood Rep, of which the Healy Historic District is but 1/72 of the neighborhood) way late in the process, and the outcome improved the project immensely.
The Healy Historic District and STRIDE groused and created a white tornado.
(Maybe the truest thing I ever heard Sharon Sayles Belton say was, "if you don't come to the table, you don't get anything.")
STRIDE and the Healy Block eschewed being a telling part of the process when they had the possibility of making a difference. Now they want to put a spanner in the works. If everything's on the table, then MNDOTs wish list is on the table too. MNDOT has succeeded in the past by being able to outwait everyone else. They got the money to play this game all day and all night into the unforseeable future. Look at the history of 35E in St. Paul. Their wish list includes widening and enlarging the trench. That is not in the self-interest of South Minneapolis residents.
WizardMarks, Central
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com
TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible.
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible.
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
